Time to revert to a back 4

[Cerberus Blade]

This is what I'd like to see happen on saturday.

I'd also like to see O'Connell at centre half. He'd be my first choice from the current crop, because he heads the ball better than anyone else. Maybe I'd be tempted to put Jake Wright alongside him too - because I think that mix of experience and youth could work well and they could help each other.

If we did that then we need to revert to 2 conventional full-backs as well. This is where it starts to get tricky because we don't have a natural left back at the club (do we?). I don't know what we'd do there, unless Riley is given a chance at full back, but I thought we'd bought him to act as a winger more than a full back?

You'll notice I've omitted to mention a certain player in all this. I just don't see any room for him if we go to a back 4 tbh. But I doubt that he'll be dropped all the same.

I think if we do go to a back 4 we'll probably do it by adding Jake Wright to the centre and leaving the other 3 as is. Which, I can understand because it means less disruption, for now, but it still leaves us with "bombscare" at centre half.

 

[IdLiketoRogerMoore]

This is what I'd like to see happen on saturday.

I'd also like to see O'Connell at centre half. He'd be my first choice from the current crop, because he heads the ball better than anyone else. Maybe I'd be tempted to put Jake Wright alongside him too - because I think that mix of experience and youth could work well and they could help each other.

If we did that then we need to revert to 2 conventional full-backs as well. This is where it starts to get tricky because we don't have a natural left back at the club (do we?). I don't know what we'd do there, unless Riley is given a chance at full back, but I thought we'd bought him to act as a winger more than a full back?

You'll notice I've omitted to mention a certain player in all this. I just don't see any room for him if we go to a back 4 tbh. But I doubt that he'll be dropped all the same.

I think if we do go to a back 4 we'll probably do it by adding Jake Wright to the centre and leaving the other 3 as is. Which, I can understand because it means less disruption, for now, but it still leaves us with "bombscare" at centre half.

Spot on about JOC. Since he came on at half time V Oxford he's been right up there amongst our best players.

Not sure abandoning a formation/system we've played all season off the back of a small blip is the answer. We saw against Fleetwood how discombobulated the players looked. As well as no LB I'm struggling to see who our wide players would be.

As our best attacking threat has been Duffy in the free No 10 role, I don't see how he fits into another formation. Having said that, teams have figured out that denying Duffy time and space is the one sure way to blunt our attacking force, Tufty does need to have a think about tweaking things.

 

[SwissBlade]

Cerberus Blade Completely disagree.

Freeman has thrived as a wingback, which is quite a different position to a fullback, mainly because it relys much less on the players defensive abilities, he plays much more advanced and is able to provide much more of an attacking role than defensive, for much of the game he plays as a right sided midfielder and gives much more width.

The role of Lafferty seems to be slightly deeper, but the principle being the same.

With the back 3 they cover the central and fullback slots, most sides operating with 1-2 strikers, more often 1 against us as they defend more. The additional cover comes from the midfield three of Coutts, Fleck and Duffy, with Coutts and Fleck alternating to play the deeper role and provide the back three.

Using the back 3 we are far more adaptable, often defending with a 4, 5, 6 or even 7 when times require, as the Lafferty, Fleck, Coutts and Freeman all slot in to cover the back three, but they are able to break quickly when the situation allows.

Dropping to a back 4 would change the dynamic in the midfield, you'd have no role for Duffy, unless he went out wide and then where do you play Freeman/ Lafferty? Fullbacks? I certainly wouldn't want freeman as fullback so does that mean Basham slots in down the right, with a new centre half partnership having to be formed?

I see more problems than benefits to changing to a back 3, especially after so much success with this set up, as the results and performances, but for a few games recently have proven.

 

[sitwell]

Abandon the system which has produced promotion form and goals galore half way through the season ? Just tell me who would play right back in a back 4 for Utd ? Who would be the 4 across the middle ? Back to square pegs round holes ,passing across the back boring football with far less attempts on goal for me. Personally I would play Wright for Basham and Done up front with Sharp ,with the option of Basham ,Hanson ,Oshea coming off the bench. That's when we have looked our best ,it doesn't matter that Done doesn't score ,he creates the space or the rest of the team to weigh in.
The system we employ is far more flexible too ,the reason we have so many goalscorers ,going back to the rigidity of 4-4-2 would stifle us.

Cant be doing with this ridiculing of EEL either. We need a strong centre half ,we have needed one since Maguire left ,a couple of dodgy games and hes held up to ridicule ? Come on give the man a break ,he has been a major part of us getting where we are ,memories of Neill fucking Collins are being short lived.

 

[Good Pinch Of Snuff]

This is what I'd like to see happen on saturday.

I'd also like to see O'Connell at centre half. He'd be my first choice from the current crop, because he heads the ball better than anyone else. Maybe I'd be tempted to put Jake Wright alongside him too - because I think that mix of experience and youth could work well and they could help each other.

If we did that then we need to revert to 2 conventional full-backs as well. This is where it starts to get tricky because we don't have a natural left back at the club (do we?). I don't know what we'd do there, unless Riley is given a chance at full back, but I thought we'd bought him to act as a winger more than a full back?

You'll notice I've omitted to mention a certain player in all this. I just don't see any room for him if we go to a back 4 tbh. But I doubt that he'll be dropped all the same.

I think if we do go to a back 4 we'll probably do it by adding Jake Wright to the centre and leaving the other 3 as is. Which, I can understand because it means less disruption, for now, but it still leaves us with "bombscare" at centre half.

Totally agree with this, clubs have worked us out. We are not good enough to play a back 3 and EEL is short on confidence. Saying that I think we will spank The Wombles this weekend and the feel good factor will be back. Everybody is feeling a bit nervous right now but with the signings made and Carruthers back I am not too worried. I think Carruthers is going to really open up the opposition if they come to try and park the bus. Lets keep positive boys !!! Look at Boltons current situation..

 

[Bayingblade]

Abandon the system which has produced promotion form and goals galore half way through the season ? Just tell me who would play right back in a back 4 for Utd ? Who would be the 4 across the middle ? Back to square pegs round holes ,passing across the back boring football with far less attempts on goal for me. Personally I would play Wright for Basham and Done up front with Sharp ,with the option of Basham ,Hanson ,Oshea coming off the bench. That's when we have looked our best ,it doesn't matter that Done doesn't score ,he creates the space or the rest of the team to weigh in.
The system we employ is far more flexible too ,the reason we have so many goalscorers ,going back to the rigidity of 4-4-2 would stifle us.

Cant be doing with this ridiculing of EEL either. We need a strong centre half ,we have needed one since Maguire left ,a couple of dodgy games and hes held up to ridicule ? Come on give the man a break ,he has been a major part of us getting where we are ,memories of Neill fucking Collins are being short lived.

I'd go with all of that SBT but Lavery instead of Done for me. Same formation, a tweak in defence (Wright for Basham and EEL going to the right side CB, JOC left) with Lafferty coming back as left WB. A little more ambition from the midfield to get in and around the box and I think we'll be ok.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

Interesting responses so far.

There's a couple of points about Freeman and Duffy that I'd like to pick up on.

I certainly wouldn't want to lose Freeman as an attacking force down the right. I agree that he's made a big contribution in that role and looks comfortable in it. But I think he can still do that from full back. We've had many good attacking full backs down the years, there's no reason why Freeman couldn't do that. Or, as I'm led to believe, Riley. I haven't seen Riley play, but I hear that he's exactly that, a player who has converted from winger to full back, but still drives forward and gets crosses in. So, we may end up using him in a similar role doing that for us? Hard to say, because we haven't seen him play, but in theory he could play in front of, or behind, Freeman, or even on the left hand side. This gives us more options if we want to go back to a 4.

I agree with the comments above that giving Duffy the freedom of the field in a midfield 5 has been a key thing for our success. In fact, strangely enough, I posted something on another messageboard a few hours ago, before I started this thread, saying exactly the same thing. I think the fact that he does keep popping up all over the place is really key. So what some of you are saying is that if we went to a back 4 he wouldn't be able to do that? I disagree again. He's still on the pitch as part of the 11, whether you play a back 3 or a back 4. You could go, 4-3-1-2 with Duffy as the 1 in that formation.

Re EEL - well, I didn't mention him by name, but you know who I was referring to - I just think he's having a bad dip in form and doesn't deserve a place in the side at present. I don't need to ridicule him - he's made himself look very incompetent over not one, but several games now. He's been implicated to some extent in most of the goals we've conceded in the past three games and when a player is going through a bad patch like this it's not a good idea to keep playing him imo. I'd take him out the firing line a bit because, sure as eggs are eggs, if he makes another cock-up that leads to a goal then he'll get some worse abuse from the kop than me nicknaming him "bombscare" on here!

O'Connell is a far better player all round than EEL. But he doesn't look like a famous TV character from the 1980's and he, doesn't have a special song because he isn't a cult hero with thousands of gullible fans either.

 

[JordoBlade]

If Wilder changed our formation I'd be disappointed. We just need to tinker with the squad a bit and don't ever start McNulty. I'd sooner start Lavery or Done. Of course some would be outraged if Done started because he simply doesn't score enough goals! However he does a hell of a lot of work to create space for others and he drags defenders out of position. Sharp and Lavery up top for me. Hanson could give us that bit of something different if we need it.

 

[LJBlade]

Totally agree with this, clubs have worked us out. We are not good enough to play a back 3 and EEL is short on confidence. Saying that I think we will spank The Wombles this weekend and the feel good factor will be back. Everybody is feeling a bit nervous right now but with the signings made and Carruthers back I am not too worried. I think Carruthers is going to really open up the opposition if they come to try and park the bus. Lets keep positive boys !!! Look at Boltons current situation..

We're not good enough to play a back 3? Wasn't that the formation that got us to the top of the league? Didn't we play 4 at the back during the first four games of the season, when we didn't win a game?

Personally I think people are overreacting. We're in a bad spell. Scunthorpe have had one and Bolton are going through one as well. Some slight changes to the line-up need to be made (Wright in for Basham and either Done or Hanson up front with Sharp) but you don't change the system that works.

 

[Good Pinch Of Snuff]

lets be honest we got lucky in allot of games. Just telling it like i see it. the current system isn't going to work for the rest of the season. In Wilder I trust and Saturday he WILL play a back 4

 

[flash-blade]

This is what I'd like to see happen on saturday.

I'd also like to see O'Connell at centre half. He'd be my first choice from the current crop, because he heads the ball better than anyone else. Maybe I'd be tempted to put Jake Wright alongside him too - because I think that mix of experience and youth could work well and they could help each other.

If we did that then we need to revert to 2 conventional full-backs as well. This is where it starts to get tricky because we don't have a natural left back at the club (do we?). I don't know what we'd do there, unless Riley is given a chance at full back, but I thought we'd bought him to act as a winger more than a full back?

You'll notice I've omitted to mention a certain player in all this. I just don't see any room for him if we go to a back 4 tbh. But I doubt that he'll be dropped all the same.

I think if we do go to a back 4 we'll probably do it by adding Jake Wright to the centre and leaving the other 3 as is. Which, I can understand because it means less disruption, for now, but it still leaves us with "bombscare" at centre half.

No need to change the system at all, it works. CW just needs to pick the correct team, the last two games he hasn't

 

[Good Pinch Of Snuff]

Done won't be playing on the left ever again....

 

[The Crab]

Done won't be playing on the left ever again....

Why, what have you done to him (I must have read that in Don Corleones voice)

 

[sitwell]

lets be honest we got lucky in allot of games. Just telling it like i see it. the current system isn't going to work for the rest of the season. In Wilder I trust and Saturday he WILL play a back 4

We got lucky ?? are you kidding ,just look at the stats of most games ,we have totally dominated but conceded from their only attack. Charlton is the best example but many others replicate this.

 

[Boxer Blade]

lets be honest we got lucky in allot of games. Just telling it like i see it. the current system isn't going to work for the rest of the season. In Wilder I trust and Saturday he WILL play a back 4

At the beginning or the end of the game? I really dont think he will alter how we start, Wilder said recently that he wont be changing how we play, so maybe some players will be disappointed and find themselves on the bench but for me stick to what has brought us "success" this season and alter it later in the game if needs must, 2-centre halves? Hanson coming on? Who knows, but I am looking forward to it, certainly looking forward to whos inthe team and on the bench.

 

[Sheffsteel]

lets be honest we got lucky in allot of games. Just telling it like i see it. the current system isn't going to work for the rest of the season. In Wilder I trust and Saturday he WILL play a back 4

Name the games where we were lucky?

I'd say so far we've been unlucky.
Created loads and loads of chances in most matches
But we've had loads of goals disallowed, hit the woodwork, missed penalties and had opposition goalies playing out of their skin.

The current system has brought loads of success and just needs tinkering.

When teams park the bus then we need tricky direct wingers who run at their defence especially late in the game when defenders become tired. Someone like Harry Chapman was very effective when he came on as sub and it's no coincedance we've struggled to break down a packed defence with him out injured.

Or try the direct approach with Hanson as the battering ram.

Try these options first and only change the system as a last resort if the above fails.

 

[LJBlade]

lets be honest we got lucky in allot of games. Just telling it like i see it. the current system isn't going to work for the rest of the season. In Wilder I trust and Saturday he WILL play a back 4

Did we get lucky or did we just create the situations from which we were able capitalise? On the flip side of that would you say we've been unlucky the last 3 games, or did we not deserve to win any of them?

I'm interested to hear why you think the system, we has worked brilliantly so far, won't work for the rest of the season?

 

[Slim Man]

We don't need to do that.

We need Wright back in the heart of the defence, we need to drop Basham, and we need Coutts and Duffy to up their game back to early season form.
And in all honesty if he stuck Done up top next game I wouldn't moan, I've had time to reflect and think about it. My choice is Lavery every single time but I think we're unbeaten when Done and Sharp have started upfront - as much as I don't rate him.

McNulty upfront opened my eyes - it really could be worse. A LOT worse.

 

[Chief_Froley]

Tbh the only way I can see a 4 at the back working with the luxury of keeping our wingbacks is a 4-1-2-1-2 narrow formation.

It tends to keep a pseudo 3-5-2 shape but loads of responsibility goes to the defensive midfielder acting as a forward defender while holding back in attacks to scoop up stray balls, link the defence to midfield and battle for possession high up (basham maybe?).

 

[BushBlade]

This is just fundamental. Until Carruthers is fit, we don't have the midfield to play 442. Billy always plays so unless you think Billy can play in a 451, forget about 4 at the back.

 

[Lane Ender]

We don't need to do that.

We need Wright back in the heart of the defence, we need to drop Basham, and we need Coutts and Duffy to up their game back to early season form.
Thats the key EEL and O,Connell need leadership Wright has got to start.
Change the formation no way its proven Coutts and Duffy are quality.
Its Fleck who needs to up his game hes go,s missing for lengthy periods for me.

 

[Sheffsteel]

McNulty upfront opened my eyes - it really could be worse. A LOT worse.

Agree with what you say and there's loads of comments questioning why McNulty was played.

However Wilder did say McNulty has looked good in training and he's already made reference to players knocking on his door asking when they are going to be given a chance to play in the first team.

If Wilder is the good manager we hope he is then you would expect that he gives EVERYONE an opportunity to break into the first team. Maybe McNulty has impressed in training so Wilder thought
"Right son.... I'm giving you a chance.... now show me what you can do".

McNulty does have half an excuse though.
No goal poacher would have done anything against a packed, solid, organised defence like Fleetwood.
Both Sharp and McNulty struggled because they had no space to get opportunities.
The Fleetwood game needed either a tricky striker who can create their own chances or a big battering ram to cause havoc. Sharp and McNulty are none of those.

 

[South Bucks]

Not sure I agree with the OP but agree that 3-5-2 as we play it with EEL can be an absolute liability when we come up against teams who know how to break quick and exploit it e.g. Walsall. Our whole midfield getting caught too high up the pitch and then just jogging back when we lose the ball was clear for all to see and I don't see this changing cos its the nature of the players we have.

Sure, 3-5-2 works fine against crap teams with no decent threat up front as we just grind them down with lots of chances until eventually one goes in but its not necessarily a receipe for promotion.

I agree we either need to change our line up and how we play 3-5-2 against better teams or I suspect we are in for several more games with lots of possession but ending up on the losing side. As CW has not changed our defensive set up since Walsall and seems a bit thick skinned I expect we will not see any changes on Saturday and we'll keep plodding on regardless for a while longer.

I do wonder if going 4-4-2 or something else against the better teams might spoil their now obvious little plan and leave us alot better set up at the back and less likely to lose and give us something more solid to build on.

 

[Sheffsteel]

I do wonder if going 4-4-2 or something else against the better teams might spoil their now obvious little plan and leave us alot better set up at the back and less likely to lose and give us something more solid to build on.

Agree we'll be more solid playing 4-4-2 but we'll lose our attacking threat and not create so many chances.
Games will become a slightly better version of the Clough/ Adkins style.
We'll probably win 1-0 and 2-1's but not look impressive.
You can bet eventhough we are winning many Blades will boo and complain that we're not creating many chances.

I believe that Wilders preference is 4-4-2
He started with this at the start of the season and only changed to 5-3-2 and an experiment.
I think if we get promoted then next season we will play the more solid 4-4-2 formation.
Our current 5-3-2 is fantastic with the right personnel and against certain oppostion but it won't work all the time. I would imagine that Wilder ans Knill will be coaching the players to be flexible and be able to easily convert from 5-3-2 to 4-4-2 mid game.

 

[Grappler]

Agree with what you say and there's loads of comments questioning why McNulty was played.

However Wilder did say McNulty has looked good in training and he's already made reference to players knocking on his door asking when they are going to be given a chance to play in the first team.

If Wilder is the good manager we hope he is then you would expect that he gives EVERYONE an opportunity to break into the first team. Maybe McNulty has impressed in training so Wilder thought
"Right son.... I'm giving you a chance.... now show me what you can do".

McNulty does have half an excuse though.
No goal poacher would have done anything against a packed, solid, organised defence like Fleetwood.
Both Sharp and McNulty struggled because they had no space to get opportunities.
The Fleetwood game needed either a tricky striker who can create their own chances or a big battering ram to cause havoc. Sharp and McNulty are none of those.

"..or a big battering ram to cause havoc..."

Agreed, it's something we didn't have until the arrival of Hanson. Clarke could have been it, but injuries have put paid to that. We don't have any real height outside of the back three and only Billy and Freeman have any real strength up front (Fleck is stocky and solid but doesn't get into the box enough)

 

[itsinyerblood]

"..or a big battering ram to cause havoc..."

Agreed, it's something we didn't have until the arrival of Hanson. Clarke could have been it, but injuries have put paid to that. We don't have any real height outside of the back three and only Billy and Freeman have any real strength up front (Fleck is stocky and solid but doesn't get into the box enough)

If only Fleck would impose himself more. He's clearly a quality act, seems to have most of what anyone would seek in a midfielder, yet at times it's as if he offers a cameo of his potential. I don't mean to sound harsh, Wilder did brilliantly to bring Fleck here, but now we need the best from Fleck, which includes asserting himself to the point where he drives forward, causes the opposition to retreat, and can then choose the right option of whether to pass or shoot. I can't quite put my finger on why Fleck seems reluctant to attack more, but maybe CW can have a word in his ear and ask him to take a few risks. If this happened and resulted in more scoring chances it might be like a light switch being clicked and the light comes on.

 

[Tyler Durden]

Doesn't make a jot of difference what we play while ever we continue to have the same sub-standard liabilities at the back.

 

[BushBlade]

Agree we'll be more solid playing 4-4-2 but we'll lose our attacking threat and not create so many chances.
Games will become a slightly better version of the Clough/ Adkins style.
We'll probably win 1-0 and 2-1's but not look impressive.
You can bet eventhough we are winning many Blades will boo and complain that we're not creating many chances.

I believe that Wilders preference is 4-4-2
He started with this at the start of the season and only changed to 5-3-2 and an experiment.
I think if we get promoted then next season we will play the more solid 4-4-2 formation.
Our current 5-3-2 is fantastic with the right personnel and against certain oppostion but it won't work all the time. I would imagine that Wilder ans Knill will be coaching the players to be flexible and be able to easily convert from 5-3-2 to 4-4-2 mid game.

We weren't very solid at the start of the season when we played 442.

 

[Torrix1889]

I would stick with the 3-5-2 but switch EEL to the right side and bring in Wright in the middle....EEL hasn't turned into a bad defender overnight, his form may have dipped but FFS we were all giving him our hearts a few weeks ago at Christmas! Could it be that EEL has been exposed by Basham's increasing tendancy to go on walkabout?

I would be tempted to give Riley the start at LWB over Lafferty...not that Laff has done much wrong i just think he's not potent enough going forward.

Midfield wise individually Coutts, Fleck & Duffy have been excellent but there's just something missing as a cohesive unit for me....we also don't score enough goals from midfield and the way we play we should be. Duffy gets pulled wide to support Sharp when he goes down the channels and Coutts and Fleck sit deep and don't penetrate the box enough...then there's no-one in the box at all....so the ball goes backwards and square. I don't know which one, if any I would drop and I don't know which of Carruthers or O'Shea I would bring in....so for now I would leave it as it is but with the option of O'Shea and Carruthers off the bench until Samir is fully fit....when i think he will start ahead of Coutts.

Up front is interesting...Sharp and one of Hanson, Lavery, Done, Clarke or McNulty....the latter two i doubt will appear much at all for the rest of the campaign, (good!). Lavery has done well but there's something that tells me Wilder maybe doesn't fancy him. For me he did well at home against Gillingham, therefore i was as mystified as everyone else why he was dropped for McNulty....attitude maybe, although he doesn't strike me as that type of player. For me it's back to Sharp and Done with Hanson off the bench...

I would go with;

Moore (not much choice now!)

EEL
Wright
JOC

Freeman
Duffy
Fleck
Coutts
Riley

Sharp
Done

Bench - Long, Hanson, O'Shea, Carruthers, Basham, Lafferty, Lavery.

 

[kennyblade]

If only Fleck would impose himself more. He's clearly a quality act, seems to have most of what anyone would seek in a midfielder, yet at times it's as if he offers a cameo of his potential. I don't mean to sound harsh, Wilder did brilliantly to bring Fleck here, but now we need the best from Fleck, which includes asserting himself to the point where he drives forward, causes the opposition to retreat, and can then choose the right option of whether to pass or shoot. I can't quite put my finger on why Fleck seems reluctant to attack more, but maybe CW can have a word in his ear and ask him to take a few risks. If this happened and resulted in more scoring chances it might be like a light switch being clicked and the light comes on.

yes agree with you about fleck but it does seem most games hes playing the defensive midfielder role and i would reverse that and put coutts deeper sure fleck has more to offer than coutts in an attacking role got a feeling duffy is gonna be under pressure from carruthers for his spot hes gonna be imprtant for us imo in run in looking forward to seeing him play